coverage of every minute of every convention as we have been covering since 1984. "washington journal" continue tomorrow at 7:00 a.m.. thank you for joining us on this tuesday. enjoy the rest of your day. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] . >> 15 minute from now we will take you live to danville, virginia where vice president joe biden is speaking at a campaign rally, one of three stops in the area, followed by a couple of events yesterday in

north carolina. we will bring you his remarks live it 10:15 eastern on c-span and c-span radio. from the romney campaign, new jersey governor chris christie has been selected to give the keynote address at a republican national convention taking place later this month in tampa, florida. in a statement this morning, reince priebus said that chris christie is "calista tackling his state's most difficult challenges while looking out for hard-working taxpayers. he is a leader of principal and conviction." marco rubio will introduce mitt romney for his acceptance speech at the convention. the senator has been a presence on the campaign trail. he was with mr. trump yesterday introducing him at an event in miami. he is in texas today to help raise funds for the campaign. c-span will have live coverage of every minute of the republican and democratic conventions. the republicans in tampa beginning on august 27, the democrats in charlotte beginning

september 4. we are standing by to take you live to remarks from vice- president joe biden in danville , virginia democrat 15. while we wait, let's look at and your calls from rawson to an internal -- from washington journal. host: candy crowley is one of the moderators for the debates this fall. jim lehrer kicking things off at the university of denver. bob schieffer of cbs will be for the final debate. martha raddatz on october 11 for the vice-presidential the bait in kentucky. and this in the news -- let's look at the schedule. the question is, if you were

moderate in the debate, what question would you ask? you can also join us on our facebook page or send us an e- mail. susan page this morning with news of the morning -- and there's this headline from the des moines register --

here's more from the president yesterday as he campaigned yesterday in iowa with just six electoral votes. we will have more from the president in a moment. let me show you what some people are saying on our facebook page -- some other news on this tuesday morning, front page of the new york times, with paul ryan on the cover -- and from the washington post --

here's more from the president on the campaign trail in ottawa yesterday. -- iowa. [video clip] >> they cannot hide the fact they don't have a plan to create jobs or revive the middle class or grow the economy. and i do have that plan. i've got a plan that puts you first. i've got a plan that puts middle-class families and folks striving to get into the middle class first. host: that was the president yesterday. and this in usa today -- brian is on the phone from las vegas nevada, independent line.

what would you ask? caller: good morning. the main thing i would ask is why do candidate, incumbent, and potential people running for political office lie about the fact that they don't talk about how overbearing and very dangerous the banking industry is? this goes back, if you read history, back to the 1700's. our founding fathers, george washington, thomas jefferson, abraham lincoln, james madison jr., andrew jackson, john taylor, tyler, the list goes on, all of them warned us -- this is written on what the banking industry would eventually do to our country. no political figure speaks on that why? host: thanks for the call. on our facebook page --

join us on our twitter page. dan is on the phone from georgetown, massachusetts on our independent line. good morning. caller: good morning at. i would like to give a shout out to the guy from las vegas. that is it right there. specific click, my question would be to the candidates, are you familiar with the rothschildss and their influence on western civilization central banking? as the other gentleman said, to thes been warned american people from the very beginning, who controls the money.

whoever controls the money controls the military, controls the media. my question would be are the familiar with the rothschild family? again, i pretty much recently figured out for the most part the entire western civilization economic policy is based on a pyramid scheme. if you look at the back of a dollar, on the top of the pyramid is that eye representing a group called the iluminati, rothschilds were a part of. host: its primary day in wisconsin, a lot of attention on the senate race. a photograph of paul ryan on the soap box, a tradition at the iowa state fair.

electionpresident's really defines a swing election. the sheboygan press -- all squaring off in the wisconsin senate primary today. from the telegram but in wisconsin ---- from the telegram in wisconsin -- and there's a piece this define, the battle to,r ryan --

more from the milwaukee journal sentinel. back to your calls. if you were posing a question, sean on the democratic line in lincoln, nebraska. caller: good morning. why is it up to the future recipients of medicare to pay for the shortfall in the budget? thatould be my question. i would expect the lawmakers would build a revenue trigger into being able to cover it instead of taking it out on future recipients. i disagree with where romney is going. i disagree with where ryan is going. i am voting for obama-biden. host: from twitter -- what would you ask the candidates? this from the quad city times -- and from the time republic --

the sioux city journal -- next this jay on our republican line. caller: hey, this is jerry. obama has no record to run on what he's done for this country. romney has a record. we know that he has a business background. we have seen him take businesses and turn them around and make profits on them. he does it for a living. that's how he makes his money. host: the romney campaign this morning with a new ad taking aim at some of the attacks by the president and the president owes its surrogates, the super pacs. this was released this morning. [video clip] >> what does it say about the

president's character when his campaign tries to use the tragedy of a woman's death for political gain? what does it say about the president's character when he had his campaign raise money for the ad and then stood by as his top aides were caught lying about that? doesn't america deserve better than a president who will say or do anything to stay in power? >> i am mitt romney and i approve this message. host: the president picked up some snow cones yesterday in iowa as part of his bus tour. paul ryan is from page of the new york times as the campaign at the iowa state fair.

that is this morning from the "new york times. tyrone is on the phone from north carolina. if you were asking a question, what would you ask the candidates? caller: good morning. yes, i would ask mitt romney why does he keep flip-floping on issues just to get the american vote set? -- votes?s >> i would ask president obama why he does not let the american people know about congress blocking him? mitt romney is saying anything just to get votes. he is taking its orders from rush limbaugh, glenn beck, and fox news. he's not truthful to the

american people. host: from the style section of the washington post -- his family has owned a construction company -- that the profile of the wife of congressman paul ryan this morning in the washington post. raymond is on the phone from orangevale, maryland. independent line. caller: yes, my question would be directed to mitt romney

pertaining to the release of his tax statements. would it be more damaging if it in revealed that he had gainban come after the olympics from the bain companies? that's the type a question for the person running for the highest office in the country. host: from the miami herald, thousands got an early start on voting in florida -- from the tallahassee democrat --

"usa today" -- that from this morning at. next is mary on the phone from mississippi. welcome to the program. caller: hi, i would like to ask the democrats of the country to search their souls and ask themselves exactly why they want to vote for obama, because i feel like if you really care

about the good of the nation, our well-being as a nation, could not with a good heart vote for him, because you have to be totally naive to see that he is totally for himself and not for the good of the country. with our debt as high as it is, there's no way we can sustain this. pretty soon we are going to be bankrupt. are you voting for a president for yourself for what you can get out of him, for what the taxpayers can give you? or do you really care about america? please search your hard and ask yourself that before you go and vote. thank you. host: the front page of the chicago tribune, a hometown newspaper for congressman jesse jackson jr. --

back to the headlines from , this one from the quad city times -- [video clip] >> i heard that president obama is starting his bus tour today. and i heard that he was not going to come to the iowa state

fair. [someone in the crowd heckling him] you know what, it's funny. iowans and wisconsinites like to be respectful to one another and listen to one another. these ladies must not be from iowa or wisconsin. you see this one here? like i said, she must not be from iowa. . all host: congressman paul ryan yesterday. ryan and obama outlined differences. jennifer jacobs, we have checked in with her throughout the

campaign season, from des the des moines register. gshe's on the phone. guest: good morning. host: i will show in a moment what it was like for mitt romney last year at the iowa state fair. first, explain the hecklers for ryan. guest: this is a group of liberal activists. they have targeted republicans and democrats. they are pretty well-known group. it was no surprise that they were there. i think the people on the soap box tend to roll with the punches, but it was really distracting. host: i want to show what happened last year with mitt romney. but let me ask the question about iowa's role, the process began in iowa, the president

spent an unprecedented three days with seven stops. michelle obama will be joining him. six electoral votes. iowa is relatively small compared to other states. why all the attention? guest: the president has said that he has sweet nostalgia for iowa, because it is the state that took the dare on him and others had doubts. he fills a connection and does not want to lose it. some people say the path to the white house means you need to get those electoral votes. it is one of the few swing states that could go either way. both candidates are really getting hard for iowa. guest: what kind of reaction did paul ryan get yesterday? guest: it was a huge crowd. republicans i spoke to at the state fair including senator grassley and others, the reaction they're getting is extremely favorable.

democrats were very scornful. host: let me take you to last year's iowa state fair with the process was getting under way. mitt romney was beginning to dip his toe into iowa politics, not forcefully entering the caucuses but appearing in a couple key events including the iowa state fair. one of the most infamous lines of the 2012 campaign thus far. let's watch. [video clip] >> we have to make sure the promises we make in social security, medicaid, and medicare are promises we can keep. various ways to do that. we could raise taxes on people. >> corporations! >> corporations are people. everything corporations earn ultimately goes to people. [laughter] where do you think it goes? >> it goes in your pocket.

>> human beings, my friend. host: we wanted to show that to give some context of what paul ryan faced yesterday. can you elaborate? guest: yes, i think that the reaction to mitt romney's comments last year were, if you are going to be president, you have to be tough and able to deal with impromptu confrontations like that. some people thought he did a fine job of handling it. paul ryan did the same thing. a lot of republicans i spoke with afterwards said they were proud of him for not getting disconcerted by all the hecklers and the governor said people are going to be very engaged and people are very passionate about passionatein iowa, so you have to expect it. host: paul ryan got some hecklers and also talked about some of his signature issues, including his budget and

reforming medicare and welfare. here's congressman paul ryan at the idea was state fair. [video clip] >> what is so disturbing about president obama's most recent actions is he took a reform that was bipartisan, signed into law by bill clinton in 1996, we called welfare reform. welfare reform was one of the most successful ideas, bipartisan policies in 20 years, because it said if you are going to receive welfare benefits, you have to go work or get ready for work or get job training so you can get back on your feet. we believe in a safety net. we believe in a safety net that is there for people who cannot help themselves, that is there to help people who are down on their luck so they can get back on their feet. and the work requirement and welfare reform did more to help the poor, did more to reduce child poverty if than any reform we have seen in a generation.

president barack obama just past a rule waving the work requirements, saying no longer do states have to have work requirements of its people receive welfare. that is gone to send us in the wrong direction. that's the wrong way to go. we want to get people a hand up and not a handout. host: that was the vice presidential candidate on the campaign trail. jennifer jacobs is joining us on the phone, political reporter for the des moines register. this headline in the new york post -- one of the many pieces said this is a battle of ideas. is it a battle of ideas in oiowa? guest: i think so. and the welfare issue is something that really does hit home with iowans. they have seen romney's television commercial about welfare and they have a visceral

reaction to it. if they want to keep the welfare to work programs in place. the obama campaign says we have not done anything to get rid of those work requirements. people are hearing different messages from the different campaigns and sometimes very opposite messages, so it's hard for them to sort out what's going on. i think they will get through it and i think this is going to be a very policy driven campaign from non. iowans are used to that. host: we asked our viewers what question they would ask the candidates. you have been around mitt romney, the president, paul ryan, and vice president joe biden. what do you think voters want to know? guest: i think they want to know exactly which tax breaks they would get rid of or which ones they would add. they probably want more specifics on. tax plans that's probably one of the biggest questions.

host: we will continue checking in with you over the next few months. thanks for being with us. guest: you're welcome. host: back to your calls. if you were one of the moderators for the debates, what would you ask the candidates? danny is on the phone in college park, georgia, democrat line. caller: with the headline should have said, paul ryan does not come out swinging, he comes out lying. i want to ask c-span, when are you all gog to do an in-depth look at the voter suppression of going on in this country? they are stealing our democracy. c-span is about democracy. i am serious about this and especially about the blatant voter suppression of going on in the great state of ohio. i would like to ask paul ryan, he is not a fiscal hawk, he is

a fiscal chicken hawk. he voted for the 700 and dollars and pushed the prescription drug bill. he pushed two wars on our credit cards. how can a man with those votes be called a fiscal conservative? first, let's tell the truth. he is just another big government republican. how can you add that much to the deficit and all of a sudden snap your fingers and become a fiscal deficit hawk. tell the truth about the man. host: on twitter -- david stockman, a familiar figure in republican party circles, served as a member of congress and budget director in the reagan administration, wrote

this editorial for the new york times -- those are the comments of david stockman. now this point of view from a former bush speech writer in the washington post --

if you were asking a question of the presidential candidates, what would be. there is calling us from oregon. caller: which candidate is willing to admit that stealing

america's buying power by moving manufacturing offshore does not actually ruin their chances of making a profit? america has always been the consumer the world. 75% of all consumable goods are bought by americans. the people overseas where they are moving manufacturing have totally different values than we do. so they are not going to spend money like americans. i am wondering who is willing to admit that by taking'away s buying they forestalled -- by taking away america's buying power they forcforestalled a renewal of the economy? host: tomorrow michelle obama will be joining the president

for his final campaign event. last night the first lady appeared on the tonight show with jay leno and was asked about health care and the president pulls his signature legislative accomplishment of the first four years. here is the first lady. >> the number-one thing you are most proud of in the first term? >> they're so much, but, truly, health reform. [cheers and applause] something that has not been accomplished by a sitting president in a century. and one of the things that struck me, i was on the plane when the supreme court decision came down with my team. and the young people on the plane, a lot of the kids 25 or so, they breathe a sigh of relief, because i did not realize several of them had pre- existing conditions. they had been worried what would happen, because they work for the government, but they will not work for the government their whole lives, so they were worried about whether they could ever get health care. if that is no longer an issue

for americans. you cannot be denied coverage. host: the first lady michelle obama on the tonight show last night. some other comments on our facebook page -- the question is, if you were to pose a question to the candidates, what would it be? welcome to the program from wilmington, delaware, phil. caller: good morning, steve. my question to the president would be why are you letting us go into third world status? why are you embarrassing us all over the world? why are you bringing down united

states? why is it that you do not care for the society and our country? my follow-up question would be and i understand that you do not want to release your records, that you have it sealed and that you really don't want to tell the united states who you really are. to answer the last caller's question about voter suppression, all you need is a regular identification you would use the cash a check or show anywhere else. that would let you vote. there's no voter suppression. it is just that people don't want -- there's a lot of fraud going on. i understand that you should show some kind id or something to prove who you are, but i guess that is too hard. the excuse is the cannot afford it and some states are giving it out for free. there's always an excuse. if you want to vote, you can vote. that would be my question to the

president and thank you so much. host: thank you, philip, from wilmington. john in north carolina -- some other headlines, front page of the new york times -- also, front page of the arizona republic -- from the orange county register -- next is dustin from north carolina, welcome, democrat line. caller: good morning. i want to say anybody that thinks president obama does not care about this country is simple-minded. first of all, when president obama came in he said he could

not do this alone. when you have the republicans signing a piece of paper and a certain book coming out saying that certain people told other people to be a do nothing congress, he cannot do it alone. the next thing would be, how democrats could vote for obama, but i don't know how republican could vote for romney, unless you are rich. he sits on the board of marriott and sat on the board as an auditor. while he sat on the board as an auditor, i think it was around $30 billion in a tax scam. of clay.e a piece lik you can tell there are other

people behind him pulling him in different directions. he does not have his own personal opinion. host: on twitter -- a look at janesville, wisconsin , a hometown of -- the home town of paul ryan i-- 11,384, that was the number that john kerry won in 2004. 2 is the number of times since 1980 that wisconsin has voted for republican presidential nominee. 49.7, the percent of the vote the republican president to candidates have averaged in florida over the past three elections. democratic nominees have averaged 48.9. almost any factor has the potential to tip the balance in

florida. mitt romney campaign is in florida yesterday in st. augustine in the morning and then late afternoon in miami, where he again talked about the romney-ryan budget plan and the president's in action. [video clip] >> this president ran for office. when he ran for office he said he was appointed to a bunch of things. he was gone to get us more jobs. he has not done that. 23 million americans out of work or stop looking for work or underemployed. i will get the jobs america needs. i know how to do it. [cheers and applause] he said he would tell people be able to hang on to their homes. we have seen a record number of home foreclosures. i will get this economy going so people will see home values going up again. the president said that under his progress we would see more people start businesses and begin to enterprises. he has been crushing small

enterprise. we are at a 30-year low in new business start-ups. if i'm president i will help small-business get going and add jobs. the president said he would cut the deficit in half. i think it's immoral for us to keep spending our kids' future. if i am president, i will cut spending and get america on track. to a track. host: mitt romney in miami florida. grover norquist, paul ryan, 2012, republican plan for success --

vivian with this -- nbc news reporting this morning on the death of the wife of a former congressman, a familiar figure in washington. the wife of former congressman lee hamilton of indiana. his wife died saturday after she was run over by her own car. if that's according to the bloomington, indiana, police. 82-year-old nancy hamilton arrived in the parking lot of a better america and around 4:15 in the afternoon, but her car was not shifted into park. as she walked behind a vehicle to retrieve her pet from the passenger side of the car, the vehicle rolled backwards, running over. the police captain said that hamilton was alone at the time and he believes the incident was entirely accidental. one city council member said this is entirely tragic and th.

hamilton joined indiana university in 1999 and remains a director of indiana university center on congress. again, the passing away over the weekend of 82-year-old nancy hamilton in an accident involving her car. travis is on the phone from battle creek, michigan. good morning to you. what would your question be? caller: i have heard paul today but not ron paul. it's like we have forgotten about him. i never thought i would say this, but i kind of agree with mitt romney. the president said he would do this and that. he said he would bring our troops home. if they are not home by the time i'm president, it will be the first thing i do. i cannot really trust him. he also said that he could not suspend deportation through executive order, so is making its sole if an illegal

immigrant is a threat to national security, they can stay here a little longer and apply for a visa. even knowy, i don't why he's still in the race. he did the whole votes for subs thing.or offering sandwiches for votes. he is flip-floping, pro-choice and then pro-life. host: thanks for the call. chris, from alabama -- in the baltimore sun -- the president taking aim at that yesterday as he campaigned in

iowa. [video clip] >> i am told that governor romney posing new running mate paul ryan might be around here the next few days. he's one of the leaders of congress standing in the way. if you happen to see congressman ryan, tell him how important this farm bill is to iiowas and rural communities. we have to put politics aside when it comes to doing the right thing for rural america and for iowa. host: the president yesterday. from the new york times -- this survey was conducted before bryan was elected, by the way. n wasfore rya was selected.

next call is stephen from tampa, arizona. good morning. -- tempe. caller: the guy from nevada had it right. the caller who just called, don't give up on our boss. he should be president. my question is, if we are serious about ending the national debt, why don't we all did the fed? and stop the banking cartel in america. i want to read from president woodrow wilson. "i have unwittingly ruined my country. a great industrial nation

controlled by a system of credit. a system of credit -- >> all of this available at our video library at c-span.org. now to danville, virginia, vice president biden, the first of three campaign stops in virginia today. that is the mayor of the town. live coverage on c-span and c- span radio. >> jill biden. [cheers and applause] -- joe biden. would all elected officials stand or wave your hand. thanks so much for being here. we are a determined city, a city in transition from the old to the new economy. a city and region that has a megapark that will house thousands of jobs. a city and region with wonderful people, great families, great

work ethic, and people who are vigorssful, who are for a successful future. we invite businesses all over the world to come take a look at us. we believe you will like it here. when you come, please bring your jobs with you. [cheers and applause] i am very proud to present to you a very dear friend, a hard- working former congressman, one who knows our city and our region well. one who helped us with several major development projects, most notably our roberson bridge, which is now open. this project alone at, our friend,to danville $28 million.

ladies and gentlemen, former congressman tom [unintelligible] >> good morning, danville. it's great to be here with one greatest products, are mayor. -- our mayor. i was proud to work with him on some economic development products and decreasing violence. it was good to see that bridge being built, as he mentioned. this institute is the heart of innovation in southern virginia. the heart of learning. it is a statement that danville never quits. danville's best days are still

ahead and it has never given up. i cannot help but see another great danville product recently, david wilson tearing it up in the preseason for the giants. i know that despite him having made it to the prose, his parents are still proud public school teachers here in the community. we have any teachers here today? [cheers and applause] i am proud to have the honor of introducing a man who understands communities like danville, came from the steel towns of pennsylvania and knows something about communities that have had been times and tough times and understands the pride of communities never quits. he is here today as he has been before, because he believes in this community and communities like it across america. he lived the american dream, did not grow up with a lot, but made

it to the u.s. senate, where he did so much, because he knew that there was a responsibility when he had made it to work to assure the american dream for so many others. when he and barack obama came through danville and other areas in 2008 that made a promise that they would wake up every day thinking about communities like this. i think that is what was on their minds when they made a decision that they were not going to let the u.s. automobile industry die on their watched. asking a question about where you come from and whether you get it, mitt romney road about he would have let the automobile industry go bankrupt. when you have spent time in communities without manufacturing traditions, that's not your gut instinct. sometimes it is a matter of what happens right in your gut. they said that's not point to happen on our watch. it's not just detroit that's roaring back. if we feel that right here at the goodyear plant down the road. it was down 1600 jobs when they

came into office and is now up to 2100 jobs and is moved from an eight-hour shift to a 12-hour shift. the leadership to be able to stand up and make that happen. that's what this election is about. whether we will build an economy that works for all americans, or just a few. and whether we will have a democracy that represents all americans or just the richest few? this is that choice. [cheers and applause] i don't mind that mitt romney is an incredibly wealthy man. what i minded the idea that he wants to raise your taxes and cut his own. [boos] what romney himself called independent third-party analysis says the middle class taxes are going to go up to thousand dollars under mitt romney's plant. what he is going to get is a $4.5 million tax cut for himself.

if you think about a police officer working here, they would have to work 618 years to make the same amount mitt romney made just in 2010. that was a year that he bragged about the fact he was unemployed . so we have a question of values. i think there's no better way to understand the value of a president or president of candidates than to see who they pick as their vice presidential candidate. i know you all are here to see the big man speak, but i served with paul ryan, so i have to take a quick second. [laughter] this -- one thing i will say is true, paul ryan is absolutely one of the leaders of this congress. this is paul ryan's congress that has a 9% approval rating from the american people. this is paul ryan's congress that wants to cut benefits to seniors and veterans in order to

give an even bigger tax cut to the highest earners. won so big that it makes president bush blushed. this is paul ryan's congress that decided to vote itself a five-week vacation without passing a farm bill when our agricultural communities are on tough times. congressaul ryan's that refused to work with the president on a bipartisan budget deal that could have gotten us out of this mess. it's paul ryan's congress that has refused to act on the president's jobs bill for over a year while doing all these symbolic measures. he wants to take us back to an era where being a woman is considered a pre-existing condition in our health care coverage. i think it is possible mitt romney is the only person in america who looked at the way this congress is behaving and said i want the brains behind

that operation. [laughter] [cheers and applause] if the choice of paul ryan tells us more than we ever wanted to know about mitt romney, then the decision to make this next man vice-president tells us the world about barack obama. [cheers and applause] this is quite simply a question of whether you get it. a question of whether you wake up in the morning understanding the struggle of the working and middle-class. jill biden and i came from the same faith tradition, a tradition that says love is the greatest amendment. -- joe biden. and it is what we do with our life that matters. our deeds. here's a man that fights for the

middle class, fighting to make sure everyone has access to the american dream, no matter what zip code you are born in. if you work hard and play by the rules, you'll have a chance to make it in this country. [cheers and applause] introduceeat honor to to you a tried and true champion of the middle class, and advocate for the american dream, and the conscience of our nation's capital, and our vice president of the united states, joseph biden. [cheers and applause]

>> hello, danville! [cheers and applause] hello, folks. how are you? i wathanks for being with us. i am looking at the future up their. -- there. it's all about stem education. i'm sure a couple of nobel laureates are up there. i'm not kidding.

it's great to be backed in danville. mayor, thank you for letting me come back in. thanks for the passport. you get invited once and that's ok. get invited back, and that means he does not know any better. [laughter] i'm just kidding. look at the shape this man is in. when he squeezes my hand, i feel like he's putting me in a vice. how about tom? [cheers and applause] this is one of the smartest guys we ever dealt with. ladies and gentlemen, i stood backstage and listened to the speech. he made it. tommy, you have said it better than i have heard anybody say it

before. i am i ugly repetitious and not nearly as convincing as tom. i hope you will forgive me. -- i am midly repetitious. folks, now that governor romney has elected congressman ryan, the differences will be even more stark. this is a decent man. as is romney. i mean that sincerely. tom and i have the same faith background and come from the same school of politics that you recognize what is good in your opponent as well as what you disagree with them on. i mean this sincerely. none of this is personal. none of this is personal. but it is critical. congressman ryan is now giving a

deposition to governor romney's vague commitments that he's been making in the last year. congressman ryan and his congressional republicans, as one person said, have already done what the governor romney is promising he will do for the nation. so this is one of those rare cases. it's almost like running against an incumbent. everybody knows what we stand for and what we want to do. we are making it clear as we can make it. but in a strange way, picking congressman ryan, leader of the republican party, a man who all the republicans have said, and it's true, is a real serious guy with serious ideas. they embraced them all. so we know now. before, governor romney had a tendency to peter ambien vague or change his position a lot -- gue or change his

position a lot. so this is a good thing for the country that we have this stark choice. we know for certain what i have been saying for some time. there is no real distinction between what the republican congress has proposed and what governor romney plans to do. and the american people have already had a glimpse of the ryan congressional republican budget and they rejected it. they have seen it. the polling data and the special election races, they saw it and they said that is not the place we want to go. at least it is my view that the overwhelming majority of americans are going to say that is not the place, that is not the path i want to go. i believe they will reject the governor romney and congressman

ryan for attempting to impose that vision on the american people. they of both good man. they call their plan bold and gusty. bold. i do not get what is gutsy about gutting medicare to pay for that. that is not new. that is not new. it is not fair. it is not fair to the working class and it will not grow this economy. we have seen this movie before

and you know how it ends. it ends in the great recession we inherited. it ends in the catastrophe for the middle class. when the president and die, when we took these offices, we said we have a different way forward. we don't think you grow the economy from a millionaires down. i come from a wealthy stayed, delaware. -- i come from a wealthy state. i have never run in my state playing the populist dream about wealthy people are bad and poor people are good. i know as many patriotic people as a note patriotic poor folks. what i do not know is how ryan and romney view the middle class.

we think the way you rebuild this country is you grow it from the middle class out the old- fashioned way, not from millionaires down. who may be a lot like you when things changed in the 1950's, he had to leave to find a job. that is how i got down to wilmington, delaware. my dad used to have an expression. he is to say, "a job is about a lot more than your paycheck. it is about your dignity. it is about respect. it is about the sense of yourself and your place in the community. it is so much more than a paycheck." all that you know at least one , two, or more.

all across america, through no fault of their own, they have been stripped of their dignity. they did nothing wrong. they showed up every day. they produced what they were supposed to do. they paid their mortgage on time. they paid their bills. they will up one day and found, i am in trouble. how many of you know someone -- i mean this sincerely -- who went to bed last night staring at the ceiling and wondering, am i going to be able to sleep in this bed under this roof two months from now? am i going to be able to make it? how many of you know a couple who said, you teller, you have

to tell her. who is going to tell her that she cannot go back to school next year because we cannot afford it. you know people like that. i know people like that. the longest walk is a short walk up a flight of stairs to a child's bedroom to say, i'm sorry. you cannot go to george washington high school anymore because daddy lost his job. mommy lost her job. with the bank said, we cannot live here anymore. you did nothing wrong. your house is worse off less than you paid for. my dad made that walk when i was in third grade. it wasn't tragic but i remember it. we are living at my grandfather's house in scranton

. my sister used to be three years younger and now she is 20 years younger. she looks 20 years younger and she is twice as smart. i guess those things factor in. not one woman in history that has been older than any man in the biden family. my dad said, "dad is going to move away from a year." wilmington. to wellingto "i will try to come every weekend. i will get a good job and i'll bring you down and it will be ok." my dad believed it was going to be ok. he convinced me to believe it.

it was a tragic. i realize he made a longer walk. he walked into my grandfather is pantry and said -- my dad was a proud, graceful man. i cannot imagine what it was like to say, "i need a favor. keep jean and the kids for a year. back."se i'll pay you you know people who have made that walk. some of you may have made that walk. the president was generous enough to ask me to join him. i asked him a question. i said, you do me what you say

about the middle class? we both kid about it. we have shorthands. we want to be able to do our overwhelming objectives. a parent to say to the child, " it is going to be ok." i live in a nice house and i do very well. some people do not believe they can say, "honey, it is going to be ok." that is what we want to restore, dignity to the middle class. help them keep their child and community college in school. protect themself from the risky

financial schemes like credit default swaps and these other creative financial instruments. give tax breaks to companies who stay home and come home, not to those who go abroad. you are a piece of that. you have a piece of outsourcing here. "governor romney pioneered at bain." everybody wants to be a pioneer, but i did not want to be on that wagon train. when i first said that, the campaign came back and said, it is obvious vice president biden does not know the difference between of shoring and outsourcing.

can you picture two pitches at the unemployment line? what difference does it make to a man who lost his job? this guy does not get it. they do not get it. they did not get it. it is almost a basic. the progress we were making has slowed down. it did not stop it. in spite of governor romney, we still went out and rescued the automobile industry. we saved a million jobs and created 200,000 good-paying union jobs that people can make a living on. where is it written that the

united states will not lead the world again in automobile manufacturing? where is it written that we cannot do that? otors is now the largest auto manufacturer in the world. we passed the toughest wall street regulation in history. wall street has been the greatest allocator of capital in the history of mankind. it that turned into a casino. we improved education for the average american for less than 1% of what the nation spends on education, we have encouraged 45 states to raise their standards to better educate our children.

you have some examples up there. we expanded by 3 million people the number of kids from working- class families who have a grant to attend college. 3 million more qualified kids in college today. we kept faith. we kept faith. coming back from iraq afghanistan with health care and better education and finding jobs. we provided tax cuts and incentives for businesses to hire vets, which they fought against for the longest time. we cut taxes for small businesses to help them grow and they say they love small business. we help millions of families to modify their mortgages, saving

them thousands of dollars a year. we also got bin laden. [cheers] let me correct that. the president of the united states and the special forces got bin laden. [cheers] i go to democratic rallies and democratic events and the democrats will say to me, why can we get down to a bumper sticker or stand for? i said, i have a bumper sticker for you now. "osama bin laden is dead and general motors is alive." that is a bumper sticker. it?ums it all up, doesn't

we are about a lot more than stickers. we are about education. fair wages decent jobs. decent 4.5 million private sector jobs in the face of the catastrophe we inherited. the fastest growth since the 1990's. but that is not enough. there is a lot of people still as a consequence of this recession we inherited. ey says they areverno

running to restore the dreams and the greatness of this country. what they did not say is the claims the congressman voted for and the governor supported put america's greatness in jeopardy. how do they think we got in this spot in the first place? what do they think happened? was it casper the ghost? who did it? we were doing just fine. had a budget surplus. we were paying down our debt and the middle class was thriving. eight years later, how did it happen? tadies and gentlemen, what hey did not say is that that

month in january have lost so far 750,000 jobs. before we were sworn in. >> that is right. >> we inherited. he got handed a trillion-dollar deficit for that year. for that year. already $1 trillion in the whole. the middle class have lost $16 trillion in wealth collectively in the equity in your homes. the thing you were counting on.

maybe to have some money in retirement. be able to help your mother and father. may be to send your kid to school after high school. evaporated. gone. done. these guys say they care about the middle class. [boos] my dad had another saying and i have been saying this for 20 years. my dad was the consummate hoste. nobody could say anything wrong in my house. some say, let me tell you what i value. my dad would say, do not tell me what you value. show me your budget and i will tell you what you value. do not tell me about your women

in the workplace and do not hire any woman. let's take a look because now we have a clear picture. we have a clear picture of what the they value. look at what they know that you can look at the budget. romney said he will let the big banks are write their own rules. unchain wall street. they will put you back in chains. they said they will do nothing about stopping the process of outsourcing. the voted down a proposal to give it tax breaks. they get a tax break for that. we will give a tax break to any company in singapore that brings

the back to danville. that is not going to change the world. but they voted against it. unopposed as -- romney opposes it. i did not get these guys. they make massive cuts in medicare throwing 19 million people in distress off of medicaid including 1 million seniors, roughly 75% of whom are women. how did the think these people in nursing homes are there/ 75% of those elderly persons in medicare in homes. they are there because of medicaid.

doesn't seem to be a problem for them all. they made massive cuts in social security for the next generation. you'll get $2,700 less if you're in your 40's. that is how they are going to save the economy. allow me insurance companies to write the rules. "you have cancer. you have hit your limit. you're on your own." "we can charge you more because you are a woman." you would think i was making this up. that is what they are proposing. they wanted to turn medicare

into a voucher system. [boos] they will tell you you not be affected but we're waiting to get these next guy's coming. come on, man. this is not on the level. in my neighborhood, nobody minds chipping in. i heard a congresswoman up in north dakota say, everybody has different obligations. she said, if you were sitting in church and because of the heavy snow and the roof collapses, you don't expect the janitor in the department store to pay as much as the owner of the department store to fix the roof. janitors do not mind contributing. everybody knows it have to beat

in on the deal. you hate being played for a sucker. the american people know they are being played for a sucker. it is all and the service of maintaining the bush tax cut for the wealthy, the top 1%. these are the facts. tom knows these side down and inside out. $800 billion of the tax cut. $800 billion will go to people with a minimum income of $1 million. $400 billion will go to 120,000

households. $400 billion going to 120,000 household while we cut medicaid, while we cut education, while we cut infrastructure. on top of that, romney comes along as does the congressman and says, we need an additional tax cut for the job creators. i'm serious. we need an additional $1.6 trillion for the job creators. i said they are good people and they'll do not need this. this is a big price tag for the middle class.

the nonpartisan tax policy center put out the price and said it was awful high. they said if the tax policy comes into law, the average middle class family with children will see a $2,000 increase in their taxes to pay for this. and he calls the president out of touch? how many of you have a swiss bank accounts? raise your hand. hey, man, how many of you have significant millions of dollars -- we do not know how much -- invested in the cayman islands? man. you guys are out of touch. how many people think you can run for president of united

states and not let the american people know what your tax returns are? [applause] this is not even mitt romney's father's republican party. this is a different party. not bad, different. i have more to say but i am saying too much already. these guys get me going and you will have trouble translating all this. thell have tendinitis' by time she is finished with this. let me try to sum it up. president and i have a different vision for america.

raising its tenants for elementary and secondary education. making sure there is still health to get to college. keep in the 2500 tax credit to send your kids to school. maintaining the pell grants. we are the leading manufacturer in the world. we see an america where my granddaughter has the exact same rights as my grandson in every single way. [applause] we see an america where women get paid the same as men for doing the same work. we see a country when you get crews the ill you did not have to go bankrupt to take care of yourself. we see a social security system protected. medicaid is available for people

in distress. that is why we strengthen the program, extended it by eight years and we did without cutting a penny in benefits. we see an america where all we maintain the only sacred obligation of the government and that is to care for those who come back, the veterans that come back. we see an america where no millionaire place at a lower rate than the average middle class person. we see a nation with the middle class tax cuts get cut and everybody pays their fair share when the middle class is no longer played for a sucker. look, the fact of the matter is that as the president said, this

is a make or break moment for the middle class in america. literally. it is clear. no one could question what the parameters of this debate are. i haven't even talked about foreign policy. i haven't talked about these dyes that want to keep 35,000 troops in iraq and want to disagree with nato and turn responsibility over to the afghans. i haven't talked about what the supreme court will look like after four years for civil- rights and civil liberties for four years of a romney administration. i have not talked about so much. i will end with this. presidential elections are an almost every circumstance decided by the voters on one overarching question -- does the

man or woman i'm going to vote for have the character of their convictions? do they mean what they say and do what they say? [applause] ladies and gentlemen, on that score, this isn't even close. the reason we will win is my buddy, my friend has it back a lot like a ramrod -- has a backbone like a ramrod. he is made the most difficult decisions since roosevelt and lincoln. he is never put his political fortunes ahead of what he thinks is right for the country. i have watched him stay with his position and not waffle.

this man has more character in his little finger than most people have in their whole body. ladies and gentlemen, you have to help us. we got to finish what obama started. we have to finish this recovery. -- to stand with us. we need to go out there and make sure that with you, we can win north carolina again. if we do, we win the election. god bless you all and may god protect our troops. thank you. [cheers and applause] >> four more years. four more years. four more years. four more years.

>> vice president biden wraps up his speech. coming up about 30 minutes, we will take you live to the cato institute for a c conversation on inequality. president obama and mitt romney are campaigning today. the president in iowa, he appeared yesterday at the state fair. we will be streaming in his remarks live at those events on our website, c-span.org. mitt romney is wrapping up his boss store today -- bus tour today. paul ryan in colorado and nevada today. mitt romney spoke yesterday in miami. he was introduced by marco rubio.

their remarks are 25 minutes. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> good afternoon, miami. i like to say a few words in spanish.

[speaking spanish] [cheers]

>> usa! usa! usa! usa! usa! >> i described how was saved a bunch of money on my car insurance. [laughter] i am honored to be here with you today. i am proud to be of and from

this community. i lift a few blocks away. i shop here -- i live a few blocks away. join me on the stage is the next president of the united states. this country has been different than the rest of the world. never in history of mankind has to been a society like this. almost everybody in the world lived in poverty. wealth and power live to a handful of people at the top. whenever your parents did for a living, that is all you were allowed to do. you're only allowed to go as far as your parents went. but that change. on this continent, some extraordinary men became nation where every person born was born

in western rights given to them by god that no government or leader could deny them. [cheers] from those principles sprung free enterprise. free enterprise create prosperity in this nation, unlike anything man has ever known before. no committee knows that better than this one -- no community knows that better than this one. because here, they or able to provide for their families and leave their children better off than themselves. this country has never been automatic. it has always required americans cept.cept acept it

we have had a president that doesn't understand that about our country. he does not believe in free enterprise. he thinks people can get ahead by pulling other people behind. he divides us against each other in a deliberate attempt to win this election. would have beeno h or will bay. we need to elect somebody who believes in free enterprise and to ensure our children inherit what they know deserve, the greatest country in human history. that is why it is my privilege and my honor to welcome to my community and to my neighborhood the next president of the united states of america,

mitt romney. [cheers and applause] >> thank you. thank you. this is the team. this team, this family are going to help me win the white house this november. [applause] better days are ahead but we will have to have a better leader in the white house. i will be that person. i know there are some people that are critical of america and think our best days are past but i know something about the heart of the american people. do not forget who won the most medals at the olympics -- we did.

[cheers] do not forget who sent a vehicle all the way to mars. who put us there? we did. [cheers] i know the chinese are working hard in getting a rocket to the moon. they will get there, i am sure. when they do, they will find an american flag there that has been there for 43 years. [applause] the people of america are going to have a choice about which course to go down. i have someone here i want to have you understand a little bit about me. this happened to be my son, my youngest boy. my baby, if you will. i am going to let him say a couple of words. and in spanish. i do not know that everybody here understands spanish. but he does. craig. [applause] >> [speaking spanish]

[applause] crowd chants: romney! [applause] >> thank you so much. i said we have a dramatic twist -- choice to make about what

kind of america we want. we will go down the path the president led which makes us more like europe or we will make america more and more like america. [cheers] this president ran for office and when he ran for office, he said he was going to do a bunch of things. he was going to get us more jobs. he has not done that. 23 million americans out of work or stopped looking for work or are underemployed. i will get the jobs americans need. i know how to do it. [cheers] he said he would help people hang on to their homes but we have seen a record number of home foreclosures. i will get this economy going so people will see home values going up again. [applause] the president said that under his progress we would see more people start businesses and began to enterprises. -- begin new enterprises. he has been crushing small enterprise.

we are at a 30 year low in new business start-ups. and i am president, i will help small businesses get going and add jobs. the president said he would cut the deficit in half. i think it is immoral for us to keep spending our kids' future. by president, i will cut spending and get america on track for a balanced budget. [applause] if you think jobs are plentiful, if you think home values are good, if you think your health care needs to be taken over by the government, you know the person to vote for and that is barack obama. [boos] but if you want someone who will get good jobs and rising wages again and rising home values and finally get america on track to having fiscal sanity, i am the person that should be the next president of the united states. [cheers and applause] the other day the president said something which i did not believe he said it. i could not believe it. he said if you have a business, you did not build it, someone

else did that for you. [boos] i thought that cannot possibly be what he meant. he said look at the context. so i looked at the context of what he said. the context was worse than the quote because he said if you are successful, you may think it is because you are smart but a lot of people are smart. and you might think it is because you work hard but a lot of people work hard. i cannot figure out where he was going with that. in my view, this has been a nation which has always celebrated people who have been successful and begun businesses and chief things in their lives. -- and achieved things in their lives. we are a nation of individuals with dreams to come here and build enterprises and better lives for themselves and their children. that is the nature of america. [applause] you know, when a person goes to work every day and says i think i am going to go to community

college and see if i can get more skills and get a promotion at work, when they get the promotion, we congratulate them. the same way to go. -- we say,, way t way to go. you made that happen. when a kid goes to school and the size to work her heart out to get the honor roll, i know they took the bus to get to school but if they get the honor rolli give the credit not to the bus driver but to the kid. [applause] so if you begin a business like this one to bring people from all over south florida, i will tell you what, i give the credit to the people who work here. not to the government to open the street for us. [cheers] senator rubio was absolutely right. from the very beginning of this country, the idea was that the rights that we have as citizens here are not given to us by our government but instead are

given to us by our creator. it is thought to give us our -- it is god that give us our rights and among those rights are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. we are free in this nation to pursue happiness. and this circumstance of birth does not limit our potential. look at marco rubio. what an extraordinary leader and example of that kind of promise of america. [cheers] that is the american dream. we want to restore the american dream. i heard speak at another -- i heard him speak at another audience somewhere. he said some the hubble not forget. when he came here and lived modestly in a community, he saw a big fan of the homes and said he never heard his parents say i wonder why those people might give us some of what they have. the parents said aren't we lucky to live in a land where if we work hard and take risks, we might be able to achieve that for ourselves. [applause]

[cheers] that is the nature of america. that is what makes america the way we are. people have come here for hundreds of years seeking opportunity, freedom to be able to pursue their dreams and when they are successful, when they achieve their dreams, they do not make us poorer, they make us better off. i will not apologize for success at home and i will never apologize for america overseas. [applause] [cheers] if i become the next president and paul ryan becomes the next vice president, we will do everything in our power to make america strong with strong homes and strong values. we will cling to the principles of the constitution and the declaration of independence. we will go to work to improve our economy.

i have five things i would do. i think i will do to get our economy growing and thriving again. we will take advantage of our energy resources here. our coal, gas, oil, nuclear, renewable. we will make sure every person has the skills they need to succeed. can noans our school and longer be in the bottom. they must be the best. we have to put the kids first in our education. [applause] number three, i want more trade. it is good for us to be able to trade with other nations. that creates more jobs. there is a huge market right next door where we can do trade, latin america. withll increase our trade latin america and crackdown on nations like china when they cheat. number four, i will get america to shrink the size of federal spending and balance the budget. [cheers] and number five, i want to have

been small businesses. we will help small businesses grow and hire more people. [applause] so that is what we are going to do. we will make sure this nation stays strong. not by virtue of a government that tries to tell us how to live our lives because i believed in the american people. i believe in you. i believe in your capacity to build a better life for yourself and your family, for the coming generations. i do not believe government can do what you can do. i believe in the people of america. you can achieve your dreams and as you do so, you will make america stronger. i will fight to keep america strong and our homes, values, economy, and military -- it will be second to none in the world. [applause] i love this country. i love america. we are going to keep america strong and the hope of the earth. thank you so very much. thank you, guys.

[applause] ♪ driving down the street today, i saw a sign for lemonade. they were the key is kids i had it kidswere the cutis ki had ever seen in this front yard. as they handed me my glass, smiling thinking to myself. what a picture perfect postcard this would make of america. it is a high school prom, a springsteen's song, a ride in a chevrolet. >> mitt romney yesterday with senator rubio. today he is wrapping up his bus

tour. paul ryan campaigning in colorado and nevada. the president is wrapping up his bus tour today in iowa. will be streaming those remarks live on our website, c- span.org. paul ryan yesterday spoke of the iowa state fair and here is elective tha look at that. >> good afternoon. we will wait just a second to let the media get positioned. my name is rick green, the editor and vice president of the "des moines register." we want to thank you for being here and appreciate your patience. we know it is hot and warm but

it is worth the wait. [applause] [cheers] >> this has been a political soapbox. this is a chance to bring forward great candidates from different levels to interact with you, the voters. the great tradition is that we have great civil discourse and we are respectful to our guests. pleasureuce the great governo of introducing the great governor of iowa, terry branstad. >> it is my honor to introduce a man who will be a great vice- president for the country. [cheers]

the voice of fiscal responsibility and a great congressman from our neighboring state, paul ryan. [applause] >> i appreciate it. >> hey. [applause] >> are there any packer fans here? [cheers] all right, cool. hey, everybody, how are you doing? [cheers] thank you so much. what a beautiful day to be at the state fair. do you have wristband day here? wristband day, you can ride all the rides with one wristband all day. from a wisconsinite to an iowan, have a wrist band. -- day.

your kids will love it. i heard president obama is starting his bus tour today. and i heard he wasn't going to come to the iowa state fair. i think it's -- i think it's ecome so -- you know, it's funny. it is funny because iowans and wisconsinites love to be respectful of one another and listen to one another, but these ladies must not be from iowa or wisconsin. [cheers] and so -- oh. they are starting to hear. like i said, you must not be from iowa. so, hey, all right. [cheers]

>> romney! romney! >> my guess is, my guess is the reason president obama isn't making it here is because he only knows left turns. [laughter] you know, but have you see him come through on his bus tour, you may ask him the same question i am getting asked, and that is, "where are the jobs, mr. president?" [applause] now, one thing we have to get straight, one thing we have to get straight is we are not growing this economy or creating jobs like we can in america. that is why mitt romney and i have a plan for a stronger middle class to get this

country growing jobs again and get us back on the path to prosperity in this country. [cheers] there are five things we will do right away to create 12 million jobs. we have energy in this country, let's use this energy in this country. [cheers] renewables, biomass, nuclear, and oil and gas. it is here. let's get it. let's not keep buying from other countries. we also need workers with skills to thrive and survive in this economy. you know what we need to do? we need to stop spending money we don't have. [cheers] president obama has given us

four years of trillion-dollar- plus deficits and is making matters worse and spending our children into a diminished future. we do not have to stand for that. on november 6, we will change that. [cheers] we also need to have free and fair trade to make more things in iowa, make more things here and sell them oversees. 97% of consumers are outside this country. we need to make more things in iowa and the midwest. if we do that, we will create jobs. [applause] [cheers] you know what? >> one more thing. one of the great things about mitt romney, is that he actually knows how to create jobs. he has created jobs, started

small businesses, turned around failing businesses. that's the leadership and experience we want to have. [cheers] this is a man with real life experiences who knows if you have a small business, you did build that small business. [applause] we need to rebuild and reenergize our small businesses and that is where our jobs come from. i have to tell you, overseas, for a wisconsinite this means lake superior, our competing nations are taxing their businesses at a lower rate than ours. president obama tells america's successful small businesses that they want the top tax rate to go to 45%.

-- 44%. [boos] the canadians just lowered the tax rate for their businesses to 15%. how on earth are our small businesses going to compete when we have other countries lowering their tax rates? we have to lower the loopholes and reductions. rates.verybody's tax and we have to stop cutting small businesses and spending that money in washington. [cheers] that's right. that's right. >> u.s.a.! u.s.a.! u.s.a.! >> thank you. another thing. we have people who are hurting in this country. people are hurting because we don't have jobs. families live paycheck to paycheck and the paychecks

aren't stretched to what they have. -- to what they used to. we have the largest deficit and biggest government since world war ii. one of six americans live in poverty today. what we have to do and need to do is get the policies that get people from welfare to self- sufficiency and dignity. [cheers and applause] what is so disturbing about president obama's reason action is that he took a reform that was bipartisan and he signed this into law by in 1996, we called this welfare reform. this is one of the greatest by partisan policies in 20 years because it said, if you will receive this, you have to get

ready for work, to get back on your feet. [cheers] you see, we believe in the safety net. we believe in a safety net that is there for people who cannot help themselves. it is there to help people who are down on their luck to get up on their feet. and the working requirement did more to help the poor and to reduce child poverty than anything we have seen in a generation. and president barack obama just got rid of those work requirements, and they're no longer has to be a work performance for people to receive welfare. this is going to send the wrong message. that is the wrong way to go. we want to give people a hand up, but not handouts. [cheers] and so, what you see from us is this. we owe you a choice.

you are our fellow citizens and we want to give you a choice to decide the kind of country you what kind of people do you want us to be? we want america to be the land of the free. a society at people reaching their potential. a society people making the most in their lives. we do not want a debt crisis. we do not want to prolong this obsession. we want to turn this around. with mid rummy we have a leader who is proven. he knows how to create jobs.

olympics and he made us proud. governor of massachusetts, raising taxes, and he increased household income. he increased the take-home pay. our job is to grow the economy and get people back to work and help people have bigger paychecks. this can be done and we can turn going. do you know what we will do? we will do this in iowa and all around the country. we will do this anywhere that we are going to do this. i feel such kindred spirits here. i live an hour and a half from debut -- iowa. this is where my mother in law is from.

i won't hold that against you. i see packers hats. are americans. america is special. america is the only country founded on an idea. that is the big difference here. facts, the principles that our veterans fought for. our rights, they come from nature and god, not from government. that is what we believe. and if we reapply those principles we can get this

country on track. help us do this thing. help us bring this state to the mitt romney column. we saved it for our kids, our grandkids. thank you, everyone. have a great -- >> president obama was at the iowa state fair yesterday evening as well. both of those events in our video library at c-span.org. we will take you live to the cato institute for a discussion getting underway talking about income and wealth. a couple of doctors who have written about income inequality will be taking questions from the audience. back to the campaign trail momentarily. you saw paul ryan there in iowa. he continues to campaign in

colorado and nevada. the president will wrap up his three day bus tour. he has three stops in iowa. we will be streaming his remarks live today on our website c- span.org. mitt romney wraps up his a bus tour in ohio today. the republican national committee announcing today that the convention that gets underway in less than two weeks will have chris christie as the keynote speaker. he will be introducing marco rubio. marco rubio and will introduce governor romney. both conventions beginning monday the 27th on c-span.

>> here on c-span and seized on radio, waiting for the this session -- and on c-span radio, waiting for this session with a couple of officers who have written about income inequality. also, our live coverage on c- span this afternoon will cover at a pentagon covering at 2:00 p.m. eastern. leon panetta joined by the chairman of the joint chiefs, a desmpsey, will be live here on c-span.

>> all right. i think we are ready to start. i am a senior fellow here with the cato institute. it is my honor and privilege to moderate this panel. i want to welcome everyone to our auditorium. both of those in the audience and those watching on c-span. we will be discussing the issue of inequality, which i think is behind almost every controversial economic issue that we have. it is fundamentally an issue of whether or not the pie gets bigger over time. if they get bigger, we cannot

get better. if it does not, one person becoming wealthy must meet other people becoming poor. you do not want to hear from me. i am going to introduce all three speakers in order that the going to speak. they will come up, give their presentations. hopefully 50 minutes less each. we're going to start with brian domitrovic here is a member of the history department. i like him a lot. he wrote a book about restoring american prosperity. that was my coming of age interest. he got his education from harvard and columbia. we will then be hearing from alan reynolds who is a senior fellow here appeared he was formerly director at the hudson institute's the national

director of economic growth. and most importantly, she was "income andof wealth." third is scott winship. advisorenior policy appeared he was educated at harvard. i am going to turn the program over to brian. >> thank you very much. it is great to see you again. it is great to be here at this institution. it becomes more and more relevant with every passing year. it is amazing what the challenges we face. they are the ones qe2 has been

setting for a long time. for years into the great recovery, we know what the 2012 election will be about. it is not going to be about -- incredibly, it is going to be about economic fairness. not about growth are solving the problem. namely the puny state governments of gdp expansion. the station has been suffering with it during the collapse of 2008-2009. forget about that. even though they are as great as we have faced in three generations. the question at hand is whether the rich are getting more than their fair share in our circumstances. until the republicans change the terms of this debate to were the clear alternative, we are

heading for a referendum on inequality. how it could have come to this is a story for another day. it represents one of the great episodes of changing the subject in recent american history. we come here today to talk about the research that lies at the bottom of the consensus on inequality at the center of the present world view and that the democrats expect the elector to take as they began. i speak of the opening passages of president obama's early budget of 2009. the research that was so far out of the ivory tower that gave the slogan for the occupied wall street movement, "we are the 99%." i speak on the modern research on income inequality put out 2003 by the french economist and his counterpart.

an article in the court delayed journal called "income equality in the united states." on the release of that research, they soon met a formidable challenge in the form of alan reynolds' counter challenge. his essential bubook. they spared a little bit back then and years before the great recession in the wake of income and wealth. who knew then that the paper would soon take on a huge new life of its own after the recession hit? it made the security blanket of the most significant protest movements since the 1960's. because the research has taken on influence in our politics and social life, far beyond all reason, i took it upon myself to

add to the critiques and emphasize some of his essential corrections in paper just issued. the paper i wrote last month is thick with historical narratives about how inequality has always been well understood in american economy. actually better than today. even in the battle days. my paper points out that the country was pretty good long before the income tax ever rolled around in 1913 at crafting public policy that made sure the baby was not there now with the bathwater. -- was not thrown out with the bathwater. the results were not too shabby. from the ratification of the constitution to a foundation of the income tax, we got a hundred fold increase in gross domestic product. please consult my paper for

these historical explications. social norms are at the bottom of the quality trend they proceed over the course of the 20th century. rather than being the historian. i want to underscore one terribly fatal mythological -- methodological thing. this is the simple fact they used pre-tax income as their central data. re-tax income. here it is in their own words enough a 2003 "income according to our definition is computed before individual income taxes and payroll taxes but after employer payroll taxes."

let's forget about the latter part. john cochran has explained why computing corporate income for individuals is a tricky endeavor. corporate nations have not changed that much. the take-home line is this. "in, according to our definition is computed before individual income tax." the big discovery was that over the course of the 20th century income equality has followed an up/down/up pattern. in the 1920's income and equality was high. it was down by the 1940's. state lows in the fifties through '70s and then shot back up. the kylix correlation that they were able to identify -- killer

correlation that they were able to and i is that the marginal rate of the income tax varied this whole time. when the marginal rate was low inequality was high. when the marginal rate was high , in the quality was low. when the marginal rate was lower again, inequality bounce back up. the intuitive conclusion is explicit. in. of high taxation the income of the rich goes disproportionately down. in the taxation it is disproportionately up. it has gotten lost in the shuffle but none of these differences has anything to do with rich individuals paying taxes. it seems that what they're telling us is that when taxes

are high in the quality is low because the government takes the from them.ey for it from the it seems the government -- and the rich make out like bandits. none of this has taken place and given that fateful definition. their unit of analysis is pretax income. when the income fell in the 40's-1970's, it is not because the government was taking it at high income rates. is because income was reported to begin with. when the income soared about the 1920's and 1980's, this represented an enormous new presentation of income to the government on the part of successful individuals. it became available for taxation. ucb deadly problem.

the rich will scramble to raise things. they are great things for things to come in high. then the rich will not bother so much to prevent their real income from being represented as taxable income. income is not taxed so much anymore. the bias is this. high tax errors make the richest in come far less than their real income. lower tax errors make the richest in come far closer to their taxable income. comparing a bit over the decades tells you nothing. you may say isn't there a nice device to tell us how much the rich is hiding their income tax

there is called taxable income. they have strive to determine the rate at which the resrich te their income. it is several decades old. the consensus has been that for every 10% increase in the marginal rate the bridge are prone to suppress their taxable income by that same rate. the underlying phenomenon is the way the rich are able to absorb real income in the force of benefits, alone and lost, right down against profits. it is a way to manipulate their taxable income. the value of taking real over taxable income goes down which the marginal rate of the income tax. if it goes down by 66 points you could be talking about the ratio of real income to taxable income

on the part of the rich going down by something like 2/3. he cut his to the during tax research. he adopted as he concentrated on the taxable income. why not marry the two? methodologicalnt metallurgica terms, why not apply them? i did in my paper. the basic pattern that emerges is this. the real income of the rich, in particular the top 1%, has been flat throughout the 20th century. flat. black.

it actually would not be so hard to simply apply the consensus. he has chosen to do something else. he has not put this for coming up but generous numbers. in a paper, he said the literature going back to the 1980's had a propensity to overstate the eti by big orders of magnitude. he concluded the paper by saying we really do any more time to sort out the effects. he sets an interesting to the new york times. he said he is trying to build a data base on the basis of post- tax income. he said it will be a huge enterprise. it would be hard. it would be hard just like it is hard to measure eti. how much to do the rich shale their income tax no one knows. the rich are being shifty. you know what is easy?

taking some 60 irs available. they to be very easy way out. they took the one readily available data and present it. pre-tax income is a terrible measure of the fluctuation of the richest fortunes. in a particular weakness, the achilles' heel, is the fluctuation in the marginal rate of the income tax. only if it were stable at a pre- tax series have any validity. they always go off the deep and explaining how the decline of labor unions is responsible for the rise in inequality in the golden era of the golden part.

if you have poor data, you should go ahead and use it appeared he should be extra sensitive to the potential shortcomings of any -- you should use it. you should be extra sensitive to any potential shortcomings. this is scientific method won a one. -- method 101. economists as it is practiced in its advanced form has no license to accept the claims. economics today only judge the trend of inequality over the 20th century. this research is now moving our politics as well as the segment of our youth in the form of occupy wall street. this is becoming far more than an intellectual curiosity.

thanks. [applause] >> now we will hear from my bashful colleague, alan reynolds. >> all need i can figure this thing out. -- only if i can figure this thing out. i am going to focus on the numbers. that is what i do. let me give you an example of misuse of these numbers. in this use would be the price of inequality called "america 1% problem." he does not present data. he talks about the data. "the simple story of america is

this. if the rich are getting richer, the poor are becoming poorer and incomes of the middle class are falling, why is that a misuse of the data. the numbers only cover the top 10%." the congressional budget office does a much better job of including everybody. and they found the average incomes of 1 topped% fell by 37% from 2007-2009. that is rough. they found that real median income rose 48.8% for 1980-2009. including a small rise between the height of 2000 and the peak of 2007. as for the poverty rate, we would get back to that.

the second major error in use of these numbers all relate to for getting these are pre-checked numbers. they are also pre-transfer numbers. they do not include any transfer payments. if social security is not income, i have a beef with the irs. \ they left out mine. the only talk about health compensation. despite that this is pre-tax income, people use these numbers as an argument for raising tax rates on the rich and increasing transfer payments to the other 99 sun.

%. that is ridiculous. it would not make any difference. the numbers exclude transfers and taxes. if you were able to increase taxes on the rich, it would not show up in their numbers. if you were somehow able to double transfer payments, that would not show up either. these numbers are used that way all the time. this graph shows that problem number one is that it is not a credible measure of income. what i'm showing here is the total income. if you're not counting much of everybody else's income, the ratio is going to be increasingly false. what i am showing its total income. as you see, and they are missing a large and growing share of personal income.

health benefits are becoming more important. transfer payments are getting bigger. they are leaving that out. this factor alone makes the top 1% rise in an illusion area manner because the denominator in come is shrinking and understated. they use a marriage of personal income for a pre-war data. here they use what is ever reported of the tax returns. the second big problem is it is not a credible measures of inequality. this gets back to the poverty rate. what you see is is when a 1 top% share rises when jacobthe top -- when the top 1% rises,

the poverty pittsburgh pirates. if you're going to use this as the top 1% you are put in the position of saying this is a good thing. and it is a reduction of inequality. the sessions are a good thing. every session but one since 1913 has fallen. the 99% should be sharing because in the two years between 2000-2009, at their share of income are a spyrose b. welcome to it. it is not much fun. there are better measures that includes everybody. a common one is called the

ginnie coefficient. -- genie coefficient. they are usually in between like .4. coefficientenie and 1980-nged between 200 2009. some academics put at a paper in 2010 or they took the coefficient from census data and make a couple of adjustments. they included cash transfers and they included the insurance benefits. that includes medicare and medicaid. they used just the cyclical

peaks. at the cyclical peak of 1989, a .372. in the peak of the 2000, it was lower. in 2000, ..362. that is a fairly broad measure of inequality. specifically adjusted. it is not rising. -- it is sickly adjusted. it is not rising. let's look at the real dollars that the top 1% recede. they did as percentages. i do it in real dollars. the blue line is salary. the green line is other, mostly business income that is taxed at the individual level.

the red line is capital gains which is the thing that drives most of the time. what is moving these things th? people rushing to buy assets, stocks, for the tax rate goes up. we did before the tax rate goes up -- the tax rates go up. this part was low, making it look like there was not much variety. in in 1997, which cut the capital gains back down to 20%. they always say that most of the trend in the top 1% has been in

labor. that is not a bad thing to say. there is a big spike after the '86 tax reform that plays havoc with all of these numbers. it is what you'd expect from et the top taxu cut rate. you should expect the amount of income reported to double. it did practically double. then it kind of leveled off. the green spikes up at the time of the '86 tax reform. that is shifting of income from corporate to noncorporate forms. the corporate tax was higher than the individual tax rate. it made sense to convert existing corporations. it also made sense for new corporations to be created in that forum. form.

it is not an increase of income. it is a different way of reporting it. the increases from 97-2000 are largely driven by the capital gains. it is a mixture of lower tax rate in technology. there's also something going on. that is stock options. by the end of 2001, stock options, at 11% of americans had stock options. there is this proliferation of non-qualified stock options. when realize, and they were taxed as ordinary income. there has been no gain in labor income. you get another spike in capital gains. then we have the 2003 cut in

capital gains to 15%. we should expect a big spike in capital gains. we see a big spike in other income. we have a tripling in real terms of a dividend income as the top1%. i never held dividend paying stocks when the tax was 40% or 50s are. at 15%, dividends a pretty good. you have a big increase. it is such a big increase in the amount of reported dividends. of course we have the recession which is the grand one of them all. and this is a simple way of describing eti. you can see how people are behaving with tax rates change. this is a quote from alan

with ay and saez young woman from mit. " there's a clear negative correlation. "his gras the when the top marginal rate was high, but slid from the 1930's and on -- from the 1930's and on, the rich are smart enough not to report income. theys pisketty and saez say is that if we treat the entire rise to the decline in the top tax rate, at this translates into electricity of top income with respect to the net of tax rate of around 1. this statement can be turned

around. it is reversible. if the electricity is around one, it means we can explain all ae rise and the top 1% at response to tax rates. that is a missing part of the story. in response to capital gains are obviously important. they said the five anglo-saxon countries. -- studied five anglo-saxon countries. what they found was we estimate that reductions in tax rates explain between 1/3 and 1/2 of the rise of the richest income group. even if it was only half, this makes these numbers really not a profit for the uses in which they're being put. it is not make them appropriate

as an excuse for raising tax rates. tax rate in transfer payments are not counted in the data. that is all i have to say. [applause] >> i can do this. i just have to minimize this. ok. there it is. >> if any of these speakers have cell phones, turn them off. it causes a little bit of feedback. >> i am a senior. i am entitled to aida portion of his income. let me think the cato institute

for inviting me to be on the panel today. really i do not get to be thelefty on the panel. i initially about half a dozen libertarians' running around. the cato institute benefited greatly from grappling with alan's work. i am glad to have a chance to respond. i want to disagree -- i want to agree that the questions that brian raises generally and about the research of pisketty and saez specifically are important ones. i sympathize.

at some point, high marginal tax rates almost surely do heard growth by reducing investment and work among those to make the most money. diminished in the quality resulting from high taxes can translate into harm done to the middle class. at the very least it can be benign. i have argued that the inequality dropped quite a bit from 2007-2009. presumably to not help anyone in the middle class or the bottom. the idea that rising equality harmed the middle-class, you have to consider the idea that that is not true. the post-1980 increase inequality down by pisketty and saez may be exaggerated. i have been analyzing a from a skeptical perspective.

this is far too weak to make them convincing. consider first whether high tax rates could hurt economic growth. it reminds us how much the new deal and world war ii change the federal income tax. as he described, income tax rates were low with the top rate no higher than 25%. starting in 1932, the top rate was above 50%. from 1940-1943, personal exemptions were lower for the first time most time americans were objected to the federal income tax. the reader driven by the new deal. the cuts were driven by the fiscal demands of world war ii. the spirits after world war one,

at top rates remained high. they remained above 50%. personal exemptions remains low so that taxation of income continued to be much more universal than have been in the past. since 1980 we have gone through a third error were tax rate to come down. more and more people have been -- era where the tax rate had to come down. more and more people have been with no tax rate at all. these changes have had some impact on economic growth. argue that they had been determinative of growth. this comparison with tell us next nothing about the

relationship between growth in taxes, even if it was valid. many things change between those two periods. these are misleading because they do not take population growth into account. population in the 1930 era grew the economy. from 1930-2011 they grew by two%. these come from the same sources that brian used. they should there's no basis for arguing that high conditions not change, the middle-class would be better off today. the mechanism for reducing inequality contribute to a precipitous decline in trend of

living standards for those not at the top of the income. i am not arguing the introduction of the income tax increase birth. am only pointing out the evidence that brian presented. pisketty and saez show for the bottom '90s term there three times richer than they were not 1917. -- 90%, they are three times richer than they were in in 1917. they were responsible for the strong and weak growth of those two decades. he argues that the postwar boom was confined to a small area in the 1960's. in either case, he presents evidence. an easy way to make this point

is to take a look at this chart am together several business cycles. i combine a few small ones between 1937-1957. i have plotted gdp per capita against the average top marginal tax rate of the business cycle. what you see is that there are two at these transitions between business cycles that support brian. the two the ec from 1937-48, you see the tax rates increased. piquancy from 1940-1957, -- from 1940-1957, a tax rate declines.

the evidence mostly goes against this. you saw rates decline, a decline in growth, and not increases. i am just making a point that the paper really does not help o'brien make his case. -- brian make the case he want to make. the picture gets a little bit better for three out of the seven transitions. they could the direction that brian hypothesizes. from 1948-1957, what happens is that taxes decline but growth per worker actually slowed. brian wants to argue that the 1960's was the only part that

experience any growth. it was largely because of tax cuts. that is a function of using the golden era as sourcing in 1940 for one year in the middle of world war ii. a lot of our workers were fighting overseas. in 1960 is the point where things got better. if you measure things from business cycle to business cycle, this shows that the 1948- 1957 looks pretty good. if you look at gdp per worker, it looks better than the 1957- 1969 era. he cannot secede from 1944-1948 there was a decline. -- you can see from 1944-1940 there was a decline.

dp per capita -- gdp per capita dropped. i strongly believe that the high tax rates of thaof that era did have a negative impact on growth. the second part of the paper in falls a subtle shift. at the first part he is arguing is that declines in inequality have trade-off in the form of slower growth. the second part he is now hat there has not been the previous decline. it is all an artifact of tax data. those both cannot be right. let me tackle the second argument as well. he argues the estimates are

misleading. this is the data showing first decline since then increases. this is almost sure to some extent. but bridge a true to some extent. where i disagree -- this is almost true to some extent. where i disagree is that this isn't important weakness of the data. -- this is an important week this. i disagree about how much tax avoidance is likely to affect pisketty and saez figures. in his earlier work, saez showed the tax is sensitive to taxable

income. despite the evidence in his later famous work with pisketty makes no reference to a taxable income. that is no true. if anyone has access to the quarterly journal, you can look at page 4 or 31. one does not have to agree with the pisketty and saez inclusion. but they do acknowledge the issue. saez tried to test the extent to which this sort of income shifting had affected his results. he concluded that 2points out of the 9 could be explained by marginal tax wages. he has tried to take a look at those can take the sum was seriously. there is an issue about the elasticity of taxable income

that is complicated. the fact that the reported taxable incomes could be sensitive to top tax rate could derive from several causes. what brian is talking about is that the rich can move their income, avoid capital gains taxes, and that is the show up in the data it produces an artifact of changes at in equality. another effect imbedded in this is that the folks at the top may choose to work less or to invest less. in which case you will see a decline or increase in income because of that response. it is not an artifact. in quality did change because of that. -- any quality -- inequality did

change because of that. saez thinks this is very small. i happen to believe with alan that the evidence is pretty weak. it in general, the literature is a mess on this question. it could be anywhere from where saez thinks it is at .5 to the higher estimates around 2. whoever is right, and it's a huge difference in how accurate their numbers. i cannot agree that it is viable to dismiss the work out right. evidence is persuasive that changes in tax code can have short-term impacts on the

type of income that shows up. the big question is whether it would affect the long run increase that ec for whether it would -- we see whether it would affect what we saw in the 1970's. that is a tougher case to make. a lot to people switch their incomes from reported income as corporate income reported on individual tax forms. that clearly shows up in the data as increases in business income received. if that change had not happened, folks still would have received that in the form of capital gains. they would have realized their gains.

it has been reported on corporate tax returns. eventually be shareholders realized this. because these are games accumulating over time, once they are realized and they show up on tax returns, it will show up as a bigger concentration of income at the top. the fact ecb spikes -- you see these spikes supports alan's case but negated the increase over time. i will stop there. this is a scenario where i wish the conventional view that there's nothing wrong with the pisketty and saez estimates was a little more gray and people were more skeptical for all the

reasons alan has given. provisionally, at the best guess as to what happened to inequality is that it has increased quite a bit at the top. that may be overturned at some point. i think for now the evidence against it is not strong enough to ditch it entirely. i will stop there. [applause] >> we will good to question and answers now. everyone has to follow the rules. we to be called on. we for the microphone for people watching online. announce your name and affiliation. we do not need to know if you are a capricorn. at least two you are and you you are with. -- who you are and who you are

with. the people on the panel want to respond to each other and what has been said, that is welcome. we want to make sure we get as many questions as possible. i am going to abuse my position and as the first question. i want to address this to brian and alan. you're making the point about pre-tax and post-income. does this change your view of going back to the world with less government and no income tax? does that change anything you have to say? >> no. to tell you the truth, i think cato need to keep going further. >> would increase inequality if we went to the state of word? -- of the wolrd?

>> we do not have the data for that. pisketty and saez is fundamentally flawed. the cannot answer that question. >> you're suggesting the behavior would be different. >> i think some people on your side would say inequality is not a problem because we have so much redistribution. you are at an institution that is not likely disposition -- does not like redistribution. >> it is not account for any redistribution. they do not count any transfer. my annuity check, the other annuity from social security, and they do not count that. you can distribute money for unemployment benefits. they do not counted. that is a much for relevant remark for the congressional

budget office which tries to meld some data that includes that. even with transfer payments, behavioral issues are key. the difficulty with transfer payments is the transfer money from people who aren't it to people who did not burn it. that discourages the person who pays the taxes. you have a disincentive. if you work too hard or you take another job, you are going to lose not only your unemployment check but food stamps and medicaid. the fundamental point is since they do not count for transfer payments or taxation, and they are fundamentally irrelevant to questions of what we should do with taxes and transfer payments. >> before i go to the audience,

you talked about the difference between what might be real changes in income versus and artifacts. you said there might be a reduction in inequality because the rich are earning less. is that a good thing? help deport?v >> this is where i don't make friends on the left. there is not actually a very strong evidence that rising inequality has actually hurt anybody. i do not think a reduction for its own sake makes much sense. if it could be shown that it actually did help people non- committal and bottom, i think people will have different views on where they stand.

it is pretty remarkable the extent to which the debate proceeds. >> let's go to questions. you can say where you work, scott. >> i am with the tax foundation. it seems we are overlooking a lot of demographic trends that are driving perceptions of inequality. in addition to the changes in business income, there have been a lot of other demographic changes i think that are driving some appearances of inequality. one is age. we have the baby boomers going through the pipe on by 7 million people nearing retirement. you have the rise of the tool earner couples-- dual